Where a testament was sought to be confirmed, the cause was allowed to be advocated from the Commissaries in consequence of a depending reduction; but, in a like case, a few days after, advocation was refused.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action betwixt the Relict of Mr John Arthur and his Oyes, the Bairns of Mr Patrick Nisbet, the Lords sustained an action of advocation from the Commissaries of Edinburgh, of a testament of she said Mr John's, desired to be confirmed before the Commissaries by his said relict, who was his executrix nominated in the said testament, and discharged the said Commissaries to proceed in the confirmation therefore until an action of reduction, intented before the Lords, for reducing of the testament, was first discussed, intended at the instance of the said Oyes against the Relict; but the Lords assigned a day in December to the said reducers, to discuss the said reduction, after the which day they would consider if any any further day should be granted, to end the reduction, or if then the matter should be remitted.
Nota. Four days before this, the contrary was done, betwixt M'Morahame and M'Morahame, where a testament craved to be confirmed, and desired to be advocated upon the like dependence of a reduction, the same was refused, and the matter remitted to other commissaries.
Act. Hope & M'Gill.Alt. Stuart & Nicolson.Clerk, Gibson.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 327. Durie, p. 228.
